Here is the first result of a search for - florida state 1600m.
They ran in lanes for one turn as you said.
Pretty weird to me since they don't do that even at the pro level.
I have never seen that before.
It seems I cannot access any flotrack videos of 2012 or 2013 FL State meet vids. But here's 2001 3200m final.
Starts in lanes.
And the guy above me posted a 1600 video. Starts in lanes.
Ok, so we have established that FL starts in lanes. So this prompts me to ask two questions:
1. Do any other states do this?
2. Why couldn't a 1500 or mile start in lanes just as easily?
Kilop wrote: Please link us to ANY high school federation rule book that stipulates the 1600 and 3200 must start in lanes.
About a 30 second search reveals this:
http://www.fhsaa.org/sites/default/files/attachments/2010/09/16/node-184/1213_track_and_field_manual.pdfPage four:
3.14.2.1.2 Event Regulations. Events in all track meets will be run as follows.
(d) The 1600m Run and 3200m Run each will be conducted in one section with a staggered start around the first turn,
followed by a break for the pole on the back straight-away.
Illinois does a modified version where they put 3 athletes on a 2-lane start line, every two lanes instead of each lane.
The Stache wrote:
No one has mentioned that so many high school federations insist that runners start in lanes, not on waterfalls, even for all distance events.
Ok, we have Florida. What other states make up this "so many"?
Ejdnejj wrote:
Ok, we have Florida. What other states make up this "so many"?
Forgive me if I twisted everyone's panties by writing "so many". I never insinuated that this was the (or even a) major reason why high schools run 1600m, just that it is a contributing factor. It certainly was in Florida's decision, according to several very senior officials who I knew back in the late 90s.
Based on his 1500 and Mile WRs, I've calculated that HEG could have run 3:41.65 for 1600 meters. This is based on a weighted average of his meter/second pace at 1500 meters and 1 mile.
Just thought y'all would like to know.
jagbombz wrote:
Around 1980
America thought they were going to go to the metric system.
Over 30 years later the only people that know any metric are drug dealers (grams) and runners (kilometers).
Don't forget all those heifers with their "two liters" [sic].
how hot is 9 wrote:
jagbombz wrote:Around 1980
America thought they were going to go to the metric system.
Over 30 years later the only people that know any metric are drug dealers (grams) and runners (kilometers).
jagbombz wrote:
Around 1980
Many states 1977, most by 1978.
T&FNews has had some scathing editorials and have never acknowledged the 1600 and 3200. I've put on some all comer meets in the summer and always get asked why the mile or 1500 and not 1600.
* wrote:
When they first invented the 1500 there was no established standard event to emulate like there was when high schools invented the 1600.
sure there was - the mile, on 440 yard tracks.
Nobody ran the 1500. When the olympics first started, the 1500 world record was slower than the amateur mile world record, and far slower than the pro world record. The first olympics was not attended by any competent milers, the 1500 being won in 4:33 when the mile WR was 4:12.
It was subsequent olympics that popularized the 1500 and also ruined it by excluding professionals. Before 1896, professional miling was a huge sport. Tens of thousands of people crammed into stadiums to see Walter George in a match race series against the US champ. The olympics was a second-rate track meet.
I could say more but I'm done hating on the 1500 for now.
We are used to the 1500, but it actually makes no sense at all. It goes...100,200,400,800...1500? WTF? Clearly the 1600 makes more logical sense on 400m tracks, but since the rest of the world doesn't see that and we have the history of records for the 1500, USA high schools might as well just run 1500 too.
In California the final for the 3200 has nearly 30 runners. Hardly capable of lanes. So saying every state does this is just plain dumb.
I do agree that 1600 is a lame distance, but it has its own history now. Switching to 1500 would never pass in a vote.
3200 is an odd distance but so is 3000. You don't run that ever either unless its over a water jump and barriers. I'd love to see a 3k for dual meets and 5k for big invitationals and championships like state. Hell, I'd love to see a 10k now and then too. Again, never going to happen.
Rsbones wrote:
We are used to the 1500, but it actually makes no sense at all. It goes...100,200,400,800...1500? WTF? Clearly the 1600 makes more logical sense on 400m tracks, but since the rest of the world doesn't see that and we have the history of records for the 1500, USA high schools might as well just run 1500 too.
Dont forget that the 200, 400, and 800 are utterly nonsensical distances to run in meters when you ignore the fact they are too, are all shifted from imperial standards 200 from the 220yd, or furlong; one eighth of a mile, the 400 from the 440yd, the quarter-mile, and the 800 from the 880yd, the half mile. The fact is that events on the track today are all standard from metric versions of quarter mile tracks. To continue with the 1500 when they started using quarter mile tracks was far more insane than switching quarter mile tracks to 400m tracks, changing the mile to the 1600m....Thats the real problem. That the olympics kept the 1500m when everyone was adopting quarter mile tracks as universal.
Stop busting The Stache's stones. It would have taken less effort for you to type "Florida 1600" in the search field on Flotrack than to draft your snide post here.
http://www.flotrack.org/video/627549-B-1600-F01-Invite-Gousse-416-2012-Florida-Relays
Well, here in Massachusetts we still run a mile and 2 mile. But, we are a wealthy state and we can afford the paint required to paint two additional lines on the track to indicate where they start. Only one finish line required.
So, either the other states are too poor to paint the additional start lines or too lazy, which is it?
Generally when citing "poor" and "lazy" as possible answers, "ignorant" shoud be included, too.
mass hole.. wrote:
So, either the other states are too poor to paint the additional start lines or too lazy, which is it?
Bad Wigins wrote:
* wrote:When they first invented the 1500 there was no established standard event to emulate like there was when high schools invented the 1600.
sure there was - the mile, on 440 yard tracks.
Nobody ran the 1500. When the olympics first started, the 1500 world record was slower than the amateur mile world record, and far slower than the pro world record. The first olympics was not attended by any competent milers, the 1500 being won in 4:33 when the mile WR was 4:12.
It was subsequent olympics that popularized the 1500 and also ruined it by excluding professionals. Before 1896, professional miling was a huge sport. Tens of thousands of people crammed into stadiums to see Walter George in a match race series against the US champ. The olympics was a second-rate track meet.
I could say more but I'm done hating on the 1500 for now.
You gave a good enough argument as to why they could have done the mile at the Olympics over the 1500.
The only response to that is that they wanted to keep it metric.
There were 1500m events, as you mentioned. So to keep it metric they ran the 1500.
I have not seen a plausible reason yet why the 1600m was invented in the late 1970's for high school.
My point was that the high schools could either emulate the Olympic 1500 or emulate the popular mile.
The 1600m? No good.
It seems there were 500m tracks for distance events in the past that gave birth to the 1000, 1500, 3000, 5000 and 10000.
The FHSAA doesn't keep any records other than the state meet so saying a race HAS to start in lanes to count isn't true.